To Neutral Speaker, or Not to Neutral Speaker...

Yes, of course.

A conspiracy-theorist or cynic might say that dealers sell ppl neutral speakers so that they can also sell them ‘romantic’ speakers later.

But kidding aside, I’m pretty sure it’s just this guy’s honest philosophy on the matter.
.

 

It's a nice way to get as close as possible to the original recording. I only play vinyl and i have a 70's Thorens table, they give some warmth to the neutral speakers.

 

I was always told that moving to actives would result in a neutral and unpleasant sound as they weren't suitable for domestic use, but in practice each of the three sets I#ve owned over the last five or so years have been excellent. I tend to lean towards a clean sound which I think gives you more of the music as-is, so that's what I lean towards.

 

I owned a pair of Harbeth C7ES-3s for a six months or so and didn't care for them. They weren't fatiguing, but they had no soundstage depth. I can't comment on the BC1, as I've never heard them.

The OP hasn't mentioned Harbeth or Spendor so not sure how relevant this is to the thread.

 

Take into account low distortion. Harbeths sound real to me because for that reason. Same with Sonus and Spendor.

 

Q to all: Does neutral automatically mean ‘natural-sounding’?

Or, is there any daylight between those terms?
.

 

Without flavor. For me.

 

In practice, speakers that are not neutral are those that I would describe as on the "bright side." Like Monitor and the current generation of B&W. Some like that, some don't. Probably depends on the kind of music you play.

 

When I sold my old P3 deck three years ago, I went round to drop it off at the buyer's place. He had a Linn system with huge Linn floorstanders, too big for his room, and he tried the deck out (as you would). I was astonished at how poor the Linns sounded. They had Linn ampification but I don't know which amp he was using. Way, way too boomy - wrong speakers for the wrong room. Still bought the deck though!

Neutral to my mind is more about removing the distortion in speakers as much as possible - that's arguably the biggest benefit (especially with actives) as you gain substantially from the technical merits of this approach accordingly. But, right speakers for the right job (and appropriate for the room they're in just as importantly).

 

I've heard the Majik 140 as part of a full Majik system (speakers, integrated amp/network player, turntable). It's hard to judge the speakers purely on their own as I wasn't familiar with the system as a whole, but they did have a strong, solid sound. I would say very smooth up top, but that was vinyl, DSP, and speakers involved. I did feel the bass was a little one note and bloated in spots, but I also was not seated in the optimum spot and I know the integrated applies a DSP to help adjust for the room.
I do remember being impressed with how spacious the sound was, even with the speakers pushed up fairly close to the wall. You might be able to get more out of them with proper placement and even tweaking or removing DSP. Or just sitting in the sweet spot with DSP. I know they were trying to show how living room friendly and simple the system could be.

If you wanted a simple $12K+ system, it's certainly an option to consider. I think it performs appropriately given the price point for all 3 pieces. If you remove the TT that brings the system down to $7K + speaker cables and one power cable. Certainly not bad at that price point and a nice one box system. I will say the TT was the most impressive element of the demo in my mind.

You'll notice that companies who do a lot of advertising also tend to be the ones who do a lot of reviews (funny that coordinating reviews is often run by a marketing department ), and they are also the ones with the most options in the market. Often times they have the largest number of dealers or online options, making it easier to impulse buy.

That doesn't mean those speakers are best. They are simply most talked about.

Yes and no. Depends on who you ask. neutral can be measured as flat. Natural-sounding is purely subjective, and is not measurable.

 

Neutral is a pretty general term. The drivers themselves will not be neutral. Off-axis response? I'd factor that in as well because how you use them in your room is key. Also, your room is not neutral, so it is going to change any neutral presentation. That said, I went with speakers designed as monitors and I've not regretted it.

 

I don't believe there is such a thing as "neutral" speakers. I get it, some speakers put more spin on the ball than others but if complete neutrality were achieved wouldn't all neutral speakers sound exactly the same? Would your dealer say there is no difference in Linn and ATC since they are both neutral? It's just a sales pitch. Anyone that is telling the amp and room are irrelevant to the sound isn't a reliable source of information.

 

My Avantgarde horn speakers are not 'neutral' probably by a long shot, but they sound very natural to me after years of fine-tuning the source components, mostly by way of tube-rolling.

The fine-tuning by ear of course takes into account the acoustic peculiarities of the listening space, which almost always 'de-neutralizes' the sound of a 'neutral' system and speakers anyway.

 

Do remember this: you are not hearing ONLY your speakers. You are also hearing everything in the chain that precedes them.
SO, there are speakers that are barely "yin" or "yang," but if your electronics "color" the sound, the speakers may sound "darker" or "lighter," or less dynamic, or fewer gradations of dynamic contrasts - or whatever your cup of tea is.
I audition between three sets of electronics: Audio Research, Conrad Johnson and NAD (because I know the sound and capabilities of each). I just listen to what remains constant when testing. It is, unfortunately, best when you can do it in your own home. Your dealer's sound (and room) will produce a different sound than yours.
So, he's right: neutral speaker, but sterile components (that's a coloration right there!) will alter your perception. And vice versa: neutral components, but speakers with drivers that produce different "colorations" will also spoil your party.

 

Speakers are the easiest thing to buy in my opinion. If they sound pleasing to your ears, they're the ones.

 

I would also add that studio monitors should be the most neutral speakers you can buy. People that are doing production work need that to accurately record, mix or do anything in the studio. Despite that, different studio monitors do not sound identical but more importantly, who likes to kick back and listen to studio monitors for fun? Listening to them for very long is fatiguing and feels like work.

 

supporting system needs to be considered.
an overly neutral sound to me is jut not pleasing over the long haul and limits the percentage of recordings that sound good.
my preference is for an optimum balance between surgical and warm and wooly biased towards the former.
i have tried highly regarded neutral measuring speakers and even with a warm supporting system it was too lean overall.
i did not want a system that required reference recordings to sound its best.

 

Depends. Listening to raw recordings is more fatiguing than listening to a final mix. Most of the BBC family speakers are based on the idea of a studio monitor.

 

This is true. I met up with a guy who was running JBL Studio 7 Series monitors off a receiver connected to his TV functioning as a streamer. He was a strong believer in measurements, and he selected the 7 Series based largely on their measurements. He also was unware of my previous work experience which allowed me to be very familiar with the 7 Series going into it.

I will say with his mild room treatments in a dedicated room, they sounded impressive. More impressive then I've heard them in some demos. But after an hour or two I was beat. He listened louder than I do, the room had a lot of bass build up, and like it was mentioned in the quote above - it was work. I was exhausted after that listening session. That isn't a room that would draw me in for day to day for listening, and certainly wasn't a room I would spend hours in listening.

And circling back to earlier conversations, it didn't feel "natural." It felt impressive the way CGI action movies are impressive, and the way macro 4K footage of rare bugs is impressive. But it certainly didn't feel natural. So that comes back a lot to what you want from a system. That listener wanted a system that was exciting. One that pushed you back in your chair and forced you to experience it. That's not my preference, but I see the appeal.

 

A bit like reading a book through a microscope, the letters look amazing but the story is harder to follow.

 

I had a pair of Linn Nexus for many years. As I remember them, quite dynamic but also a bit strident. Neutral not really

 

I'm always quite amazed by what people think and write when it comes to the term "neutral sound". So, I'll comment a few posts regarding some things.

Neutral means "neutral to the source material written on the medium you're replaying". Neutral sounding recordings will sound natural. **** recordings won't. However, I'd always go for a highly neutral system because i want to hear what the artist intended me to hear. If I listen to punk, it has to sound ****. If i listen to some realistic classical recording, it has to sound natural. If i listen t oelectronic music, i have to hear all the subtleties in the sound textures. etc. The only way to hear what the artist intended is to go for a neutral system. The other approach is to have coloured equipment and make everything sound samey. Not for me. That's what I'd find boring and self-indulgent.

My experience with neutral equipment is exactly the opposite. It is very unremarkable at the first listen. But then, you slowly realize that it just shows you what's on the medium and it shows itself as a chameleon. With neutral equipment - engagingly recorded music sounds engaging and unengagingly recorded music sounds unengaging. It's not the system's work to sound this way or the other, but the recorded music's.

Which leads me to the following:

Speakers don't make music. Music (recorded in this case) makes music. The system just shows that if it's properly neutral or it doesn't if it isn't neutral. Music is musical, not the equipment. Some music isn't musical - but that also shouldn't be down to the equipment. I've always found claims such as "the speaker/amp makes music" completely nebulous.

Neutral=| unpleasant. Just as neutral =| unpleasant. Again - recorded music is pleasant/unpleasant. The system should just show that if it's neutral. Or sugar-coat everything you throw at it if it isn't. It's up to you. As I've written at the beginning of my post - i choose to hear the artist's intent that's been written on the medium and m+not force my "taste" on everything. Self-indulgent and boring.

 

Emphasizing of details is not neutrality. Another misconception. This is false hyper-realism. Some speakers do that, but that has nothing to do with neutral sound.

 

Good posting this, the you have the synergy question....also one's kit upstream may not be 'neutral solo speak.

 

Obviously you need to properly audition and make your own mind up, but as someone who uses ATCs in both of my systems I'd say that if they are what you want then buy the biggest pair you can afford/your room can handle and if possible go the active route. ATCs are genuinely neutral, sometimes scarily so, but as someone who has used them for at least twenty five years I've never found them dull or uninvolving and they can also be fun and put a smile on your face, at the very least a long demo of ATCs will show you how coloured most other speakers are, you may prefer colouration, but it's good to hear the difference.